About Me

Author of "Common Genius" -- a brief history of how common people built the prosperity of free nations, and how the intelligentsias usurp control and bring on decline -- go to: www.thecommongenius.com
Just published the sequel--"Wasted Genius," How IQ and SAT tests are Hurting Our Children and Crippling America. An analysis of how our schools and colleges are adding the the intellectual morons who make up the New Ruling Class. See www.thewastedgenius.com

Tuesday, May 7, 2013

The Nature VS Nurture Problem -- Part I --

What Forces Shape the Adult Person?

It is common knowledge that every individual is
unique. But what determines the many combinations that make each of us different?
And, let's face it, those final differences, at maturity, make some individuals
much more competent and praise-worthy than others. Since we know that all human
embryos, everywhere in the world, are endowed with an approximately equal range
of potential, why do some end up as aborigines grubbing in the ground for food,
while others end up teaching Astro-Physics at MIT?

Most reasonable observers agree that all human
adults are shaped from conception to adulthood by the interplay of two forces: their genes and the environment they are
exposed to. Those that stress the environment are of the general opinion that
the new born infant is actually a "blank slate" waiting to be
developed and matured strictly by whatever environment and nurturing he or she
is exposed to. But even they, while advocating the supremacy of nurture over
nature, will usually concede that each child is stamped with certain
predetermined traits, most obviously height, skin color, body shape, hair and
eye color, the various forms of intelligence, predisposition to specific
diseases, and even individual personality traits. In those respects, we all
tend to resemble our parentage.

The "nature" people argue, rather ineffectively,
that most everything about a person is predetermined at birth with little
subsequent impact from the environment. This argument is sustained only if you
consider an adult to be no more than his physical appearance and personality.
Numerous best-selling books by eminent academics stress this
"predetermined" nonsense by concentrating merely on what are really
quite superficial traits. Being born a
natural "blond," or with an attractive physique or personality, will
help a person succeed in life, but there is much more to a mature adult than
just a pretty face. Simple examination of history's great men and women shows
that they functioned in extraordinary manner regardless of their widely
different inherited characteristics.

Modern neuroscience has provided
environmentalists with support for their emphasis on the importance of positive
nurturing.It appears that human beings
have the unique distinction, compared to most all other living forms, of
possessing brain structures that develop gradually after birth in response to
challenges encountered and environments experienced. Unlike a gazelle, that can
get up and flee a lion within minutes after birth, humans accumulate specific
skills until they are about 25 years of age. Gazelles, like ants and bees, are
pre-programmed, largely determined by genes, and lack the adaptability to
acquire important skills best suited for their particular environment. This
adaptability, a gradual accumulation of skills and knowledge by each young
person, renders the human adult light years ahead of the child he once was.

Now, granted,
genes do contribute to some of those advances gained as a child grows up. A
child with a certain type of brain, one that is especially facile with abstract
or algorithmic concepts, may turn out to be a great scientist; and one with a
high level of physical skills may be a great athlete or dancer. But those
acquired skills cannot be developed in a vacuum. There are virtually no
scientists or ballet dancers in the remote jungles of undeveloped areas of the
globe. There has to be an enabling society and supportive institutions for any significant
and positive development. And, even within an advanced society, one that offers
wide exposure to enabling experiences, many great minds and bodies languish in
obscurity, undeveloped, and never applied to beneficial activities, despite
being endowed with the most favorable genetic blueprints.

Thus, although it seems fairly well established
that genes are a relatively small part of it, and environment is critical in
shaping human development, there is little consensus on what the most favorable
"environment" should be. Many parents devote extraordinary effort in
trying to create the best environment for their children only to despair at the
frequently mediocre results. Social engineers call for more school funding,
headstart programs, more college scholarships, a "new" math, and
every possible reform du jour. It would very helpful to know what really
counts, and what is wasted.

Sometimes it pays to step back, take a fresh
look, and see if you have strayed off course. The folly of pursuing useless
policies, or accepting what are commonly accepted solutions, is an all too
human failing. It may pay to re-evaluate the environment we are providing our
children, and that will be considered in Part II of this blog.